Focus Pocus

"A new idea is something they don't know yet."-Don Draper, questioning the efficacy of a focus group that relayed conventional wisdom rather than what he wanted to hear on a recent episode of Mad Men

It recently came to my attention that the Mets administered focus groups to gauge the mindsets of the various categories of ticket buyers (season tickets, plans, individual tickets, etc...).

That the focus groups took place should not surprise anyone. The Mets are a multi-million dollar business participating in a billion dollar industry. Naturally, the stakes are higher than a semi-pro sports league. You can't fault the Mets for using standard marketing tactics to acquire information that might help sell a few more tickets or a few more pieces of merchandise. It's a big business. Focus groups are something big businesses do.

Still, I found the image of what I heard about the recent focus groups perplexing. A friend of mine, who commented under condition of anonymity due to privacy concerns, provided me with a brief overview of what transpired when a group of individual ticket-buying Mets fans offered their two cents to an independent consultant on Monday at Citi Field. You can likely guess a lot of the topics included. Others, not so much.

The group, which consisted of thirtysomethings and up from across the tri-state area, certainly covered the bases you'd expect them to cover. The consultant asked about the Citi Field experience, which induced responses about the awfully loud music, obstructed sightlines, and need for more Shake Shacks. The consultant asked about the cost of tickets, which the group felt was worth half what the Mets charge and made inexplicably complicated by the team's variable pricing structure. The consultant asked about the face of the franchise, which the group designated as "no one" because David Wright hasn't quite made the leap yet while a minority still bought into the fallacy that the Mets have a pro-Latin bias.

The consultant asked if the group felt it important to know the team's overall strategy, which induced responses that the fans would really like to just be under the impression that the team has any kind of meaningful strategy to execute.

On the day after the Mets players admitted to struggling with the agony of defeat and a lost season, the consultant successfully brought the frustrations of the Mets fan base to the surface. The group described the Mets as "pathetic," "hopeless," and "embarrassing." They struggled to justify paying the prices asked by the ticket office to see the debacle currently sporting the orange and blue. They worried about raising their kids as Mets fans for fear of introducing them to this kind of heartbreak.

On the day the Mets made an above-slot investment into the future of the organization, the group participants filled out questionnaires about how they'd like to see the Mets operate. The questionnaire asked if the participants preferred power hitting and home runs to a pitcher's duel, young players to veteran players, and free agent acquisitions to a home-grown farm system among other items. Or they could select "Doesn't matter." What they could not choose as a response was "All of the Above," "A Healthy Balance of Each," or "More, please."

The focus group is a formality. It would seem easier to comb through the comments sections of the online version of your local paper or MetsBlog or Amazin' Avenue to decipher the angst felt by the majority of Metsopotamia, but it means a little more to hear it from the fans rather than infer it from an obscenity-laden tirade delivered by an otherwise shy Mets fan hiding behind the anonymity of the internet. Take solace in knowing the Mets are actively trying to gauge the opinions of the fan base, even if I can't explain how the perceptions of the front office will directly help move a few extra ducats.

However, I sincerely hope whoever ends up using the results of that focus group and the others express no surprise whatsoever at what they heard. I certainly didn't. The feelings of resignation and anger are palpable these days in Metsopotamia. I'll concede that we the fans forgot about setting the bar for the 2010 Mets at .500 baseball. We took for granted the good fortune experienced by the club earlier in the season and misjudged the feasibility of sustaining it. We are complicit in this malaise to an extent, whether we care to admit it or not.

I'll also admit that the frustration we now feel emanates from an ownership and front office that failed to justify its player personnel decisions and illuminate why standing pat at the trade deadline may actually have been a good thing. It comes from a manager who skates by unchecked due to his personality rather than his in-game acumen. It concentrates itself on the albatross contracts of Perez, Francoeur, and, to a lesser extent, Castillo among others that restrain the team from seeking resolutions to their ailments in earnest.

We're thrilled that the Mets are making a concerted effort to hear the cries of its beleaguered fan base. (By now, those pleas should be loud and clear.) We know there's a lot of good people working behind the scenes to make the Mets a superior product and find their sentiments aligned with ours more than either side would care to admit.

However, we're not the ones getting paid substantial sums of money to dig up the resolution that puts the team and organization back on track. It's our money they're spending. Even if we keep coming back to baseball like sheep, the Mets still need our support to keep the ship running. And if they don't want to end up like the Pirates or Royals with their diminished attendance and paltry winning percentages, they'd better start experimenting with new ideas rather than ignoring the issues facing the Mets and feigning superiority.

From what I understand, the consultant's final question to the focus group asked them to compare the Mets to a type of car. It elicited responses of Yugo, Scion, and a Pinto. As my friend in attendance put it, "We're a Ford; the Yankees are Cadillacs."

Amazin' Avenue's James Kannengeiser thinks Wally Backman is not a suitable candidate to replace Jerry Manuel. I still don't understand why folks who back Backman aren't clamoring for Tim Teufel as well. Teufel has a similar resume (both as a Minor League manager and fiery '86 Met) and comes without the legal trouble. Neither would be my pick, but it's interesting nonetheless.